Ah, back to my original point. Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses.... Bandwidth.
The last I tried the hit the drop pool through Tucows, I was gettting nothing but busy signals. It was a waste of time and I've since quit. Am I missing something here? (off list?). So long as Tucows hasn't committed their drop bandwidth to others, can't we find a better way to use it ourselves, say guaranteed bandwidth on-demand? There may be little or no dev involved-- with the applications left to the users. This had been free -- and pretty useless -- so Tucows was generating no direct value. I'm OK with "highest and best use" too, I just don't want that imposed at the wholesale level. Specifically, I'd be willing to pay $X for bandwidth if I expect to pick-up several domains worth $2-4X total. That's empowerment. Pool, Enom, and now Snap all take the $2-4X for themselves. That's self-interest. Best, Loren elliot noss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > this summarizes well what I was trying to convey. that this market is in > a state of flux and we do not want to waste scarce dev resources on > something that will change. > > a few more bits. kudos Joe. I have used highest best use as an important > analogy in this marketfor a while now (hey were you actually listening > to my comments in the public forum in Rome! ;-)). the prices WILL go up > as efficiency increases. and they should. and this is a good thing. and > inactive registrars will not be able to collect fat fees for doing > nothing but engaging in regulatory arbitrage. > > the primary reasons that I see the current situation as far from the end > are twofold. one, the present structure exists because of current > structural inefficiency and two, the dollars flow in a way that > guarantees a state of flux (ie, there is excess economic rent as a > function of the inefficiency). sorry for being a bit obtuse but if we > were all talking in a bar over beers...... > > Regards > > Gordon Hudson wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Loren Stocker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "JB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 5:46 PM > > Subject: Re: SnapNames switches to auction-based system -- any OpenSRS > > opportunities? > > > > > > > >>Huh? Just what don't I get here? You think I'm against the drop market? > > > > That's > > > >>nonsense. I love it. Defend it. > >> > >>What I'm suggesting here is that Tucows engage in the drop market in a way > >>that empowering users, rather that simply extract maximum value for > > > > themselves > > > >>as does Pool, Snap, and Enom. What ever happened to loyality? > > > > > > The problem is that the way domains drop is not within the control of Tucows > > or any of us. > > The goalposts could easily change at any time. > > This could mean husge amounts of wasted time and money for Tucows and > > resellers. > > Personally, if I thought the drop business was sustainable long term > > I would already be offering it to customers in some form. > > I am not yet convinced that it is a long term business. > > > > Of course I could be wrong, but I have so many projects underway right now > > this is one > > of the least attractive of the possible avenues to go down. > > > > Regards > > > > Gordon Hudson > > Hostroute.com Ltd > > www.hostroute.net > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ >
